Comparison of the sensitivity of in vitro and in vivo tests for detection of the presence of a bovine viral diarrhoea virus type 1 strain

Veterinary vaccines are usually tested for the absence of contaminants. However, the quality control does not always imply that vaccines are not contaminated as, for example, illustrated by the bovine herpes virus 1 (BHV1) vaccine used in The Netherlands in 1999 that contained a small amount of bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV1). Thousands of cows were vaccinated with BHV1 vaccine batches, and the question arose as to whether these small amounts of BVDV1, most likely not detected with in vitro tests, could have infected cattle. More in general, the question was whether the outcome of the in vitro tests, i.e. the in vitro infectivity, was indicative for the infectivity for cattle, i.e. the in vivo infectivity. We therefore carried out in vitro experiments to determine the sensitivity of a BVDV1 isolation assay. In addition, we performed two animal experiments, in which we estimated the lowest dose needed to infect calves with BVDV1. We extrapolated the experimental in vitro and in vivo results from a tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50) to a cattle infectious dose (CID50). We observed a partial response in the calves inoculated with this dose: four out of six calves turned out to be infected. In the tissue culture test, all 20 samples tested negative. The response in vivo, however, was not significantly higher than the in vitro response, which implies that no difference in susceptibility was observed between the animal test and the tissue culture test. Based on the results in our experiments, some cattle may have been infected with BVDV1 after the application of the contaminated BHV1 vaccine during the vaccination campaign. The question remains that how many cattle received contaminated vaccine, and became infected with BVDV1.     

Protective effects against abortion and fetal infection following exposure to bovine viral diarrhea virus and bovine herpesvirus 1 during pregnancy in beef heifers that received two doses of a multivalent modified-live virus vaccine prior to breeding

Objective-To determine whether administration of 2 doses of a multivalent, modified-live virus vaccine prior to breeding of heifers would provide protection against abortion and fetal infection following exposure of pregnant heifers to cattle persistently infected (PI) with bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) and cattle with acute bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) infection. Design-Randomized controlled clinical trial. Animals-33 crossbred beef heifers, 3 steers, 6 bulls, and 25 calves. Procedures-20 of 22 vaccinated and 10 of 11 unvaccinated heifers became pregnant and were commingled with 3 steers PI with BVDV type 1a, 1b, or 2 for 56 days beginning 102 days after the second vaccination (administered 30 days after the first vaccination). Eighty days following removal of BVDV-PI steers, heifers were commingled with 3 bulls with acute BHV1 infection for 14 days. Results-After BVDV exposure, 1 fetus (not evaluated) was aborted by a vaccinated heifer; BVDV was detected in 0 of 19 calves from vaccinated heifers and in all 4 fetuses (aborted after BHV1 exposure) and 6 calves from unvaccinated heifers. Bovine herpesvirus 1 was not detected in any fetus or calf and associated fetal membranes in either treatment group. Vaccinated heifers had longer gestation periods and calves with greater birth weights, weaning weights, average daily gains, and market value at weaning, compared with those for calves born to unvaccinated heifers. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-Prebreeding administration of a modified-live virus vaccine to heifers resulted in fewer abortions and BVDV-PI offspring and improved growth and increased market value of weaned calves.     

Foetal protection against bovine virus diarrhoea virus after two-step vaccination

In order to assess the efficacy of a two-step vaccination protocol with respect to foetal protection against transplacental infections with bovine virus diarrhoea virus (BVDV) with special attention to BVDV-2 seronegative heifers were vaccinated with an inactivated BVDV-1 vaccine and boostered with a modified live BVDV-1 vaccine after 4 weeks. A second group was left unvaccinated as control. Between days 30 and 120 of pregnancy the heifers of both groups were intranasally challenged with a mixture of BVDV-1 and -2. All heifers of the vaccinated group gave birth to nine clinically healthy, seronegative (precolostral) and BVDV-free calves. In contrast in the control group four BVDV viraemic underdeveloped calves were born. Additionally, one calf was stillborn and another viraemic calf was not viable and died 2 days after birth. All six calves of the control group were viraemic with BVDV-2. This study demonstrated for the first time that two-step vaccination of breeding cattle with a modified live BVDV vaccine 4 weeks after application of an inactivated BVDV vaccine was capable of providing a foetal protection against transplacental infection with BVDV-2.     

Reactivation of latent bovine herpesvirus 1 in cattle seronegative to glycoproteins gB and gE

Six heifers were vaccinated intranasally with the live bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) temperature-sensitive (ts) vaccine strain RBL106 within 3 weeks of birth. These calves most likely still had maternal antibodies against BHV1. Thereafter, these heifers were vaccinated several times with an experimental BHV1 glycoprotein-D (gD) subunit vaccine. At the age of 3 years these 6 heifers were seronegative in the BHV1 gB and gE blocking ELISAs, but had neutralizing antibodies against BHV1, probably induced by the vaccinations with the gD subunit vaccine. Five of these 6 heifers excreted BHV1 after treatment with dexamethasone. Restriction enzyme analysis of the genome of the excreted viruses revealed that all 5 isolates had a BHV1.1 genotype and that isolates of 3 heifers were not obviously different from the ts-vaccine strain. The restriction enzyme fragment pattern of the isolate of 1 heifer was clearly different from the pattern of the ts-vaccine strain. It is concluded that cattle can be seronegative against BHV1 gB and gE but can still carry BHV1 in a latent form. This finding strongly suggests that there are completely BHV1 seronegative cattle that are latently infected with BHV1. The impact of this finding on BHV1 eradication programmes is discussed.     

Effect of maternal antibodies on induction and persistence of vaccine-induced immune responses against bovine viral diarrhea virus type II in young calves

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of maternally derived antibodies on induction of protective immune responses against bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) type II in young calves vaccinated with a modified-live bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) type I vaccine. DESIGN: Blinded controlled challenge study. ANIMALS: 24 neonatal Holstein and Holstein-cross calves that were deprived of maternal colostrum and fed pooled colostrum that contained a high concentration of (n = 6) or no (18) antibodies to BVDV. PROCEDURE: At 10 to 14 days of age, 6 seropositive and 6 seronegative calves were given a combination vaccine containing modified-live BVDV type I. All calves were kept in isolation for 4.5 months. Six calves of the remaining 12 untreated calves were vaccinated with the same combination vaccine at approximately 4 months of age. Three weeks later, all calves were challenged intranasally with a virulent BVDV type II. RESULTS: Seronegative unvaccinated calves and seropositive calves that were vaccinated at 2 weeks of age developed severe disease, and 4 calves in each of these groups required euthanasia. Seronegative calves that were vaccinated at 2 weeks or 4 months of age developed only mild or no clinical signs of disease. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results indicate that a single dose of a modified-live BVDV type-I vaccine given at 10 to 14 days of age can protect susceptible young calves from virulent BVDV type II infection for at least 4 months, but high concentrations of BVDV-specific maternally derived antibodies can block the induction of the response.     

Prevention of persistent infection in calves by vaccination of dams with noncytopathic type-1 modified-live bovine viral diarrhea virus prior to breeding

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of a modified-live virus (MLV) bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) type 1 (BVDV1) vaccine administered to heifers prior to breeding to stimulate protective immunity that would block transmission of virulent heterologous BVDV during gestation, thus preventing persistent infection of a fetus. ANIMAL: 40 crossbred Angus heifers that were 15 to 18 months old and seronegative for BVDV and 36 calves born to those heifers. PROCEDURE: Heifers were randomly assigned to control (n = 13) or vaccinated (27) groups. The control group was administered a multivalent vaccine where-in the BVDV component had been omitted. The vaccinated heifers were administered a single dose of vaccine (IM or SC) containing MLV BVDV1 (WRL strain). All vaccinated and control heifers were maintained in pastures and exposed to BVDV-negative bulls 21 days later. Thirty-five heifers were confirmed pregnant and were challenge exposed at 55 to 100 days of gestation by IV administration of virulent BVDV1 (7443 strain). RESULTS: All control heifers were viremic following challenge exposure, and calves born to control heifers were persistently infected with BVDV. Viremia was not detected in the vaccinated heifers, and 92% of calves born to vaccinated heifers were not persistently infected with BVDV. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These results document that vaccination with BVDV1 strain WRL protects fetuses from infection with heterologous virulent BVDV1.     

Humoral Immune Response and Assessment of Vaccine Virus Shedding in Calves Receiving Modified Live Virus Vaccines Containing Bovine Herpesvirus‐1 and Bovine Viral Diarrhoea Virus 1a

Susceptible calves were administered modified live virus (MLV) vaccines containing bovine herpesvirus‐1 (BHV1) and bovine viral diarrhoea type 1 (BVDV1a) strains intramuscularly, with one vaccine containing both MLV and inactivated BHV‐1 and inactivated BVDV1a. There was no evidence of transmission of vaccine (BHV‐1 and BVDV1a) strains to susceptible non‐vaccinated controls commingled with vaccinates. No vaccinates had detectable BHV‐1 in peripheral blood leucocytes (PBL) after vaccination. Each of three vaccines containing an MLV BVDV1a strain caused a transient BVDV vaccine induced viremia in PBL after vaccination, which was cleared as the calves developed serum BVDV1 antibodies. The vaccine containing both MLV and inactivated BHV‐1 induced serum BHV‐1 antibodies more rapid than MLV BHV‐1 vaccine. Two doses of MLV BHV‐1 (days 0 and 28) in some cases induced serum BHV‐1 antibodies to higher levels and greater duration than one dose.     

Outbreak of bovine virus diarrhea on Dutch dairy farms induced by a bovine herpesvirus 1 marker vaccine contaminated with bovine virus diarrhea virus type 2

On 23 February 1999, the Dutch Animal Health Service advised all Dutch veterinary practices to postpone vaccination against bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) immediately. The day before severe disease problems were diagnosed on four dairy farms after vaccination with the same batch of BHV1 marker vaccine. Using monoclonal antibodies, bovine virus diarrhoea virus (BVDV) type 2 was found in the vaccine batch. This paper describes an outbreak of BVDV type 2 infection caused by the use of a batch of modified live BHV1 marker vaccine contaminated with BDVD. Sources of information used were reports of farm visits, minutes of meetings, laboratory results, and oral communications from the people involved. The first symptoms of disease were observed on average six days after vaccination. Morbidity was high on 11 of the 12 farms. On five farms more than 70% of the animals became ill, while on one farm no symptoms could be detected. During the first week after vaccination, feed intake and milk production decreased. During the second week, some animals became clinically diseased having nasal discharge, fever, and diarrhoea. At the end of the second week and at the start of the third week, the number of diseased animals increased rapidly, the symptoms became more severe, and some animals died. Mortality varied among herds. Necropsy most often revealed erosions and ulcers of the mucosa of the digestive tract. In addition, degeneration of the liver, hyperaemia of the abomasum, and swollen mesenterial lymph nodes and swollen spleen were found. On 11 of the 12 farms all animals were culled between 32 and 68 days after vaccination after an agreement was reached with the manufacturer of the vaccine. This was the third outbreak of BVD in cattle after administration of a contaminated vaccine in the Netherlands. The possibilities to prevent contamination of a vaccine as a consequence of infection of fetal calf serum with BVDV are discussed. Improvement of controls to prevent contamination before and during vaccine production, and improvement of the monitoring of side-effects is necessary.     

Evidence for an immunocompromising effect of bovine pestivirus on bovid herpesvirus 1 vaccination

Five calves were given live intranasal vaccine against bovid herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) two days after intranasal inoculation of bovine pestivirus (BVDV). Another 5 were vaccinated in the absence of BVDV. Control unvaccinated groups were also maintained. All calves were challenged with virulent BHV1. The unvaccinated calves developed signs of infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR) and both vaccinated groups showed a similar degree of clinical protection from IBR. Those given BVDV before vaccination shed up to 140 times more BHV1 (P less than 0.01) in the nasal mucus following challenge than those which had received BHV1 vaccine alone. The epidemiological significance of this is discussed.     

Evidence for an immunocompromising effect of bovine pestivirus on bovid herpesvirus 1 vaccination

Five calves were given live intranasal vaccine against bovid herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) two days after intranasal inoculation of bovine pestivirus (BVDV). Another 5 were vaccinated in the absence of BVDV. Control unvaccinated groups were also maintained. All calves were challenged with virulent BHV1. The unvaccinated calves developed signs of infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR) and both vaccinated groups showed a similar degree of clinical protection from IBR. Those given BVDV before vaccination shed up to 140 times more BHV1 (P<0.01) in the nasal mucus following challenge than those which had received BHV1 vaccine alone. The epidemiological significance of this is discussed.     

Humoral immune response and assessment of vaccine virus shedding in calves receiving modified live virus vaccines containing bovine herpesvirus-1 and bovine viral diarrhoea virus 1a

Susceptible calves were administered modified live virus (MLV) vaccines containing bovine herpesvirus-1 (BHV1) and bovine viral diarrhoea type 1 (BVDV1a) strains intramuscularly, with one vaccine containing both MLV and inactivated BHV-1 and inactivated BVDV1a. There was no evidence of transmission of vaccine (BHV-1 and BVDV1a) strains to susceptible non-vaccinated controls commingled with vaccinates. No vaccinates had detectable BHV-1 in peripheral blood leucocytes (PBL) after vaccination. Each of three vaccines containing an MLV BVDV1a strain caused a transient BVDV vaccine induced viremia in PBL after vaccination, which was cleared as the calves developed serum BVDV1 antibodies. The vaccine containing both MLV and inactivated BHV-1 induced serum BHV-1 antibodies more rapid than MLV BHV-1 vaccine. Two doses of MLV BHV-1 (days 0 and 28) in some cases induced serum BHV-1 antibodies to higher levels and greater duration than one dose.     

Serological status of cattle to bovine viral diarrhoea virus and bovine herpesvirus 1 at entry to and exit from Australian feedlot backgrounding facilities

A total of 6195 cattle were enrolled in this observational study. Serum antibody concentrations to bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) and bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) were measured at entry to and exit from backgrounding facilities to assess their statuses on arrival and the extent of seroconversion to these viruses during backgrounding. The backgrounding facilities were contiguous with five feedlots in: Queensland (two sites), New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia. Cattle were held in the backgrounding facilities for a minimum of 29 days and a median of 34 days. On backgrounding facility entry, 32.7% of the study population was seronegative to BVDV, but 85.7% was seronegative to BHV1. After commingling in the backgrounding facilities, of the cattle that were seronegative on backgrounding facility entry, 33.9% and 30.3% showed a serological increase to BVDV and BHV1, respectively. At backgrounding facility exit, when cattle were placed in their feedlots, 19.6% and 59.1% were seronegative to BVDV and BHV1, respectively, and 0.26% were persistently infected with BVDV. There was a strong association between seroincrease to BVDV and seroincrease to BHV1 (P = 0.005) at animal level in cohorts known to contain an animal persistently infected with BVDV.     

Comparison of performance of dairy herds that were or were not vaccinated with a bovine herpes virus 1 marker vaccine in 1998

This study analysed the effects of the use of bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV1) marker vaccine on the performance of dairy cattle. In Spring of 1999, vaccination of 12 herds with the BHV1 marker vaccine resulted in severe animal health problems and mortality. The vaccines used on these farms were all from a batch that appeared to be contaminated with bovine virus diarrhoea virus type 2. This led to a general call to farmers and veterinary practitioners to report side-effects of this vaccine. As a result, more than 7000 farmers reported symptoms. The information was obtained by means of a questionnaire; there was no control group. To determine the effects of the use of the marker vaccine, it was necessary to perform a study based on objectively acquired information. The information collected by the Royal Dutch Cattle Syndicate and the office of Identification and Registration was complied into herd indices on production, udder health, reproduction, and culling. Two groups of dairy farms that had used the BHV1 marker vaccine (attenuated and inactivated vaccine) were compared with farms that were certified BHV1-free. The analyses were performed based on intra-herd comparisons, meaning that per herd each index calculated over a certain period of time after the use of the marker vaccine was compared to a similar period of time prior to the use of the marker vaccine. A total of 144 comparisons were made. Seven comparisons were statistically significant. In two comparisons, the results were in favour of the BHV1-free farms and in five comparisons, the result were in favour of the vaccinated farms. Thus use of the BHV1 marker vaccine could not be proven to affect herd performance. The sensitivity of the tests was very high, so with a high level of probability even very small differences in indices between groups would have been detected.     

Efficacy of bovine viral diarrhea vaccine used in Japan against bovine viral diarrhea virus type 2 strain 890

Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) has been segregated into two genotypes, type 1 and type 2. To determine the efficacy of the commercially available bovine viral diarrhea type 1 vaccine used in Japan against BVDV type 2, calves were infected with BVDV type 2 strain 890 4 weeks after administration of the vaccine. The vaccinated calves did not develop any clinical signs and hematological changes such as observed in unvaccinated calves after the challenge. Furthermore, the challenge virus was not recovered from the vaccinated calves throughout the duration of the experiment, whereas it was recovered from all unvaccinated calves. The bovine viral diarrhea vaccine used in Japan is efficacious against infection with BVDV type 2 strain 890.     

Predicted ages of dairy calves when colostrum-derived bovine viral diarrhea virus antibodies would no longer offer protection against disease or interfere with vaccination

OBJECTIVE: To develop models that could be used to predict, for dairy calves, the age at which colostrum-derived bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) antibodies would no longer offer protection against infection or interfere with vaccination. DESIGN: Prospective observational field study. ANIMALS: 466 calves in 2 California dairy herds. PROCEDURE: Serum BVDV neutralizing antibody titers were measured from birth through 300 days of age. The age by which colostrum-derived BVDV antibodies had decayed sufficiently that calves were considered susceptible to BVDV infection (ie, titer < or = 1:16) or calves became seronegative was modeled with survival analysis methods. Mixed-effects regression analysis was used to model colostrum-derived BVDV antibody titer for any given age. RESULTS: Half the calves in both herds became seronegative for BVDV type I by 141 days of age and for BVDV type II by 114 days of age. Rate of antibody decay was significantly associated with antibody titer at 1 to 3 days of age and with whether calves were congenitally infected with BVDV. Three-month-old calves were predicted to have a mean BVDV type-I antibody titer of 1:32 and a mean BVDV type-II antibody titer of 1:16. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results provide an improved understanding of the decay of BVDV-specific colostrum-derived antibodies in dairy calves raised under typical field conditions. Knowledge of the age when the calf herd becomes susceptible can be useful when designing vaccination programs aimed at minimizing negative effects of colostrum-derived antibodies on vaccine efficacy while maximizing overall calf herd immunity.     

Foetal Protection against Bovine Virus Diarrhoea Virus after Two‐step Vaccination

In order to assess the efficacy of a two‐step vaccination protocol with respect to foetal protection against transplacental infections with bovine virus diarrhoea virus (BVDV) with special attention to BVDV‐2 seronegative heifers were vaccinated with an inactivated BVDV‐1 vaccine and boostered with a modified live BVDV‐1 vaccine after 4 weeks. A second group was left unvaccinated as control. Between days 30 and 120 of pregnancy the heifers of both groups were intranasally challenged with a mixture of BVDV‐1 and ‐2. All heifers of the vaccinated group gave birth to nine clinically healthy, seronegative (precolostral) and BVDV‐free calves. In contrast in the control group four BVDV viraemic underdeveloped calves were born. Additionally, one calf was stillborn and another viraemic calf was not viable and died 2 days after birth. All six calves of the control group were viraemic with BVDV‐2. This study demonstrated for the first time that two‐step vaccination of breeding cattle with a modified live BVDV vaccine 4 weeks after application of an inactivated BVDV vaccine was capable of providing a foetal protection against transplacental infection with BVDV‐2.     

Evaluation of protection against virulent bovine viral diarrhea virus type 2 in calves that had maternal antibodies and were vaccinated with a modified-live vaccine

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of an adjuvanted modified-live bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) vaccine against challenge with a virulent type 2 BVDV strain in calves with or without maternal antibodies against the virus. DESIGN: Challenge study. ANIMALS: 23 crossbred dairy calves. PROCEDURES: Calves were fed colostrum containing antibodies against BVDV or colostrum without anti-BVDV antibodies within 6 hours of birth and again 8 to 12 hours after the first feeding. Calves were vaccinated with a commercial modified-live virus combination vaccine or a sham vaccine at approximately 5 weeks of age and challenged with virulent type 2 BVDV 3.5 months after vaccination. Clinical signs of BVDV infection, development of viremia, and variation in WBC counts were recorded for 14 days after challenge exposure. RESULTS: Calves that received colostrum free of anti-BVDV antibodies and were vaccinated with the sham vaccine developed severe disease (4 of the 7 calves died or were euthanatized). Calves that received colostrum free of anti-BVDV antibodies and were vaccinated and calves that received colostrum with anti-BVDV antibodies and were vaccinated developed only mild or no clinical signs of disease. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results indicated that the modified-live virus vaccine induced a strong protective immune response in young calves, even when plasma concentrations of maternal antibody were high. In addition, all vaccinated calves were protected against viral shedding, whereas control calves vaccinated with the sham vaccine shed virus for an extended period of time.     

Safety and efficacy of an E2 glycoprotein subunit vaccine produced in mammalian cells to prevent experimental infection with bovine viral diarrhoea virus in cattle

Bovine viral diarrhea (BVD) infection caused by bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), a Pestivirus of the Flaviviridae family, is an important cause of morbidity, mortality and economical losses in cattle worldwide. E2 protein is the major glycoprotein of BVDV envelope and the main target for neutralising antibodies (NAbs). Different studies on protection against BVDV infection have focused on E2, supporting its putative use in subunit vaccines. A truncated version of type 1a BVDV E2 (tE2) expressed in mammalian cells was used to formulate an experimental oleous monovalent vaccine. Immunogenicity was studied through immunisation of guinea pigs and followed by trials in cattle. Calves of 8-12?months were vaccinated, twice with a 4?week interval, with either a tE2 subunit vaccine (n?=?8), a whole virus inactivated vaccine (n?=?8) or left untreated as negative control group (n?=?8). Four weeks after the last immunisation the animals were experimentally challenged intranasally with a non-cythopathic BVDV strain. Following challenge, BVDV was isolated from all unvaccinated animals, while 6 out of 8 animals vaccinated with tE2 showed complete virological protection indicating that the tE2 vaccine presented a similar performance to a satisfactory whole virus inactivated vaccine.     

Detection of bovine virus diarrhea virus in a live bovine herpes virus 1 marker vaccine

In February 1999, 12 Dutch herds were vaccinated with a live bovine herpesvirus 1 vaccine from which bovine virus diarrhea virus (BVDV) could be isolated. All vaccine batches that were on the Dutch market and that had not yet reached the expiry date were tested for BVDV. In total, seven of 82 batches tested were found positive. Batch numbers TX3607, VB3914, VB3915, VB4046, TW3391, and TV3294 were positive for BVDV type 1, and batch number WG4622 was positive for BVDV type 2. This latter batch induced clinical signs of BVDV in an animal experiment with susceptible animals.